1. Title, director and release year? Addicted to Plastic, Ian Connacher, 2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The central argument of this film is that plastic, like oil, has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. The film follows the narrator as he travels all around the world to find how plastic is used in each of the countries he visits and to learn what scientists from these countries have learned about the effects of plastic use to our environment. He covers the entire lifecycle of plastic and what companies, countries and individuals are doing to reduce their plastic use.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out? This film mainly draws out sustainability problems concerning the environment and organization. The other topics he brushes on are as solutions. The film mainly focused on plastic that finds its way into the ocean and onto beaches, and more specifically the resin pellets that find their way into the water. The major problem is that smaller pieces of plastic attract more harmful chemicals than larger pieces of plastic. Consequently, a majority of the plastic that finds its way into the oceans just break down into smaller pieces and do not actually biodegrade. Because of this, many of the plastic pieces attract these harmful chemicals which are then eaten by fish who think they are food, who are eaten by other fish, and then eventually eaten by human or other larger animals. Approximately 80% of the plastic in the ocean comes from land. It is estimated that there is about 46,000 pieces of plastic in every square mile of the ocean. There is 10 times more plastic in the ocean at this point than plankton. This is hardly healthy for the oceanic ecosystem. On land, 7-8 kilogram of plastic washes up per kilometer of beach per day. Sea birds then eat this plastic which eventually kills them. In Japan, scientists collect the plastic resin pellets they find on the beach and test them for chemicals. What they have found is that these pellets carry very lethal chemicals and toxins. In India, they have a problem with their sacred cows eating trash on the sides of the road. Wal-Mart will also be coming to India soon which will inevitably bring more plastic waste when the rising upper and middle class citizens begin to shop there. BPA is also present in many plastics which is known to cause cancer. Plastic bottles are also a health hazard because they contain antimony, which is white lead. As for organizational problems, plastic is very hard to recycle. Therefore, it is hard for companies to successful recycle plastic. When products are made of more than one plastic, they are almost impossible to recycle. Only 5% of the plastic in the United States is actually recycled. Lots of our waste is just shipped or sold to India and China. This is an obvious sustainability problem because we are not reducing waste, we are just moving it somewhere else, that consequently has the potential to create more waste than us. Plastic is also almost always down-cycled as opposed to recycled because it loses its positive qualities. Unlike other materials, it can only be reused for a finite amount of time.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? I really enjoyed the structure of the film and how we followed the narrator to different parts of the world to find how plastic was being treated in each nation. I also enjoyed how this film provided evidence of all different realistic solutions to this sustainability problem. He wasn’t at all “preachy” which allowed me to easily take in the information he provided. I also was compelled by all of the interviews that he conducted with scientists and owners of the sustainable companies. The animations for the plastic pellet starting at a manufacturing plant and then making its way to the ocean also gave me a comprehensive overview of how plastic pollution begins.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? I found this film entirely enjoyable and thought it did a thorough job of covering all of the important topics. There is really nothing that would deter me from the film’s message.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.? I would like to have a more in depth understanding of the recycling process and what it takes to truly recycle as opposed to down-cycle. I would also like to learn about companies that focus on reducing waste and recycling as a secondary solution. I was also really intrigued the company, Patagonia, and would love to learn how it is that they recycle their products into new ones and for how long this cycle can go on.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems? I think this would be great for elementary and middle school students. It is simple enough for them to understand and it is particularly entertaining. It would be quite easy for a teacher to set up a field trip or project to go along with this film. Teachers could also use this to preclude a beach clean-up or some kind of group activity to properly dispose of plastic waste.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film? Unlike the other films, “Addicted to Plastic” presents many solutions to this issue. A major part of the film is just showing how different nations, companies and individuals work to reduce the amount of plastic that pollutes the land and water. Greenpeace is an organization that helps pick up waste that finds its way into the ocean. Denmark has set up a sophisticated recycling system that has increase the recycling rate to 90%. TieTek is a company in Texas that takes all of the plastic in Houston and recycles it into railroad ties. Patagonia is an apparel company that recycles all of its clothes when consumers no longer wear them. In Kenya and India, individuals take plastic bags and other plastic waste and turn them into trinkets. WasteAway is a company that turns plastic into fluff that can be used in fertilizer, although I don’t think that is really healthy for the soil or the rest of the environment. In Germany, a group of scientists are perfecting the process of turning plastic waste back into oil. There is a company in Ireland that turns Styrofoam into plastic. This is only partially environmentally friendly because plastic biodegrades eventually while Styrofoam does not. Other companies are creating compostable bioplastics while others are making plastics that “dissolve in water.”
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? The film could have gone a little more in depth into the science behind the solutions that are presented and how the recycling system works in Denmark so that we can learn from it. It also would have been interesting if the film focused a little more on reducing waste as opposed to recycling it.
1. Title, director and release year?
Addicted to Plastic, Ian Connacher, 2008
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of this film is that plastic, like oil, has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. The film follows the narrator as he travels all around the world to find how plastic is used in each of the countries he visits and to learn what scientists from these countries have learned about the effects of plastic use to our environment. He covers the entire lifecycle of plastic and what companies, countries and individuals are doing to reduce their plastic use.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
This film mainly draws out sustainability problems concerning the environment and organization. The other topics he brushes on are as solutions. The film mainly focused on plastic that finds its way into the ocean and onto beaches, and more specifically the resin pellets that find their way into the water. The major problem is that smaller pieces of plastic attract more harmful chemicals than larger pieces of plastic. Consequently, a majority of the plastic that finds its way into the oceans just break down into smaller pieces and do not actually biodegrade. Because of this, many of the plastic pieces attract these harmful chemicals which are then eaten by fish who think they are food, who are eaten by other fish, and then eventually eaten by human or other larger animals. Approximately 80% of the plastic in the ocean comes from land. It is estimated that there is about 46,000 pieces of plastic in every square mile of the ocean. There is 10 times more plastic in the ocean at this point than plankton. This is hardly healthy for the oceanic ecosystem. On land, 7-8 kilogram of plastic washes up per kilometer of beach per day. Sea birds then eat this plastic which eventually kills them. In Japan, scientists collect the plastic resin pellets they find on the beach and test them for chemicals. What they have found is that these pellets carry very lethal chemicals and toxins. In India, they have a problem with their sacred cows eating trash on the sides of the road. Wal-Mart will also be coming to India soon which will inevitably bring more plastic waste when the rising upper and middle class citizens begin to shop there. BPA is also present in many plastics which is known to cause cancer. Plastic bottles are also a health hazard because they contain antimony, which is white lead.
As for organizational problems, plastic is very hard to recycle. Therefore, it is hard for companies to successful recycle plastic. When products are made of more than one plastic, they are almost impossible to recycle. Only 5% of the plastic in the United States is actually recycled. Lots of our waste is just shipped or sold to India and China. This is an obvious sustainability problem because we are not reducing waste, we are just moving it somewhere else, that consequently has the potential to create more waste than us. Plastic is also almost always down-cycled as opposed to recycled because it loses its positive qualities. Unlike other materials, it can only be reused for a finite amount of time.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I really enjoyed the structure of the film and how we followed the narrator to different parts of the world to find how plastic was being treated in each nation. I also enjoyed how this film provided evidence of all different realistic solutions to this sustainability problem. He wasn’t at all “preachy” which allowed me to easily take in the information he provided. I also was compelled by all of the interviews that he conducted with scientists and owners of the sustainable companies. The animations for the plastic pellet starting at a manufacturing plant and then making its way to the ocean also gave me a comprehensive overview of how plastic pollution begins.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
I found this film entirely enjoyable and thought it did a thorough job of covering all of the important topics. There is really nothing that would deter me from the film’s message.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
I would like to have a more in depth understanding of the recycling process and what it takes to truly recycle as opposed to down-cycle. I would also like to learn about companies that focus on reducing waste and recycling as a secondary solution. I was also really intrigued the company, Patagonia, and would love to learn how it is that they recycle their products into new ones and for how long this cycle can go on.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
I think this would be great for elementary and middle school students. It is simple enough for them to understand and it is particularly entertaining. It would be quite easy for a teacher to set up a field trip or project to go along with this film. Teachers could also use this to preclude a beach clean-up or some kind of group activity to properly dispose of plastic waste.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
Unlike the other films, “Addicted to Plastic” presents many solutions to this issue. A major part of the film is just showing how different nations, companies and individuals work to reduce the amount of plastic that pollutes the land and water. Greenpeace is an organization that helps pick up waste that finds its way into the ocean. Denmark has set up a sophisticated recycling system that has increase the recycling rate to 90%. TieTek is a company in Texas that takes all of the plastic in Houston and recycles it into railroad ties. Patagonia is an apparel company that recycles all of its clothes when consumers no longer wear them. In Kenya and India, individuals take plastic bags and other plastic waste and turn them into trinkets. WasteAway is a company that turns plastic into fluff that can be used in fertilizer, although I don’t think that is really healthy for the soil or the rest of the environment. In Germany, a group of scientists are perfecting the process of turning plastic waste back into oil. There is a company in Ireland that turns Styrofoam into plastic. This is only partially environmentally friendly because plastic biodegrades eventually while Styrofoam does not. Other companies are creating compostable bioplastics while others are making plastics that “dissolve in water.”
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The film could have gone a little more in depth into the science behind the solutions that are presented and how the recycling system works in Denmark so that we can learn from it. It also would have been interesting if the film focused a little more on reducing waste as opposed to recycling it.